Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Test-Suite Friction Remediation

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-07-13 Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • [~] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — Intentional deviation: this is a test-infrastructure/tooling mission whose domain objects are the guards, ratchets, and CI jobs. Naming them (test_no_dead_symbols.py, runtime_bridge, quality-gate.needs) is necessary precision, captured in Key Entities. The requirements still describe behaviour to achieve, not a prescribed code diff.
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs — user = maintainer + CI gate; value = no false-reds on correct refactors, no un-gated suite jobs.
  • ✅ Written for the relevant stakeholders — the stakeholders here are engineering/PO; purpose_tldr/context are stakeholder-legible.
  • ✅ All mandatory sections completed.

Requirement Completeness

  • ✅ No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain.
  • ✅ Requirements are testable and unambiguous — each FR names an observable end-state; NFR-002 pins non-fakeable DoD evidence.
  • ✅ Requirement types are separated (Functional / Non-Functional / Constraints).
  • ✅ IDs are unique across FR-001..013, NFR-001..006, C-001..008.
  • ✅ All requirement rows include a non-empty Status value.
  • ✅ Non-functional requirements include measurable thresholds — NFR-002 lists per-class grep/byte-identity checks; NFR-004 ruff/mypy clean + complexity ≤15.
  • ✅ Success criteria are measurable — SC-001..006 are pass/fail behaviours.
  • [~] Success criteria are technology-agnostic — relaxed for the same reason as Content Quality item 1; SC's are outcome-phrased (false-reds, un-gated jobs) but reference the guard surfaces they govern.
  • ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined — 3 scenarios, each with trigger/happy-path/exception + a must-always-hold rule.
  • ✅ Edge cases identified — seed-tuple laundering, dropped shard-registry import, deletion-before-gate ordering.
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded — explicit Out of Scope + C-001/C-002 route-out/split-out.
  • ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified — A-001..005, NFR-001 ordering dependency.

Feature Readiness

  • ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria (via SC + NFR-002 DoD anchors).
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (correct-refactor-not-penalised, deshim-lands-clean, no-un-gated-job).
  • ✅ Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria.
  • [~] No implementation details leak — accepted deviation, domain-appropriate (see above).

Notes

  • Three checklist items carry an intentional, documented deviation ([~]) because the mission's domain object is the codebase's own test infrastructure; abstracting away the guard/file names would make the requirements untestable. This is an honest relaxation, not an oversight.
  • No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers: the pre-spec adversarial squad + two operator scope decisions resolved every open question before authoring.
  • Ready for /spec-kitty.plan.